1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to faucets, specifically to a device which enables users to control water flow in a basin fixture by leaning against the front of the basin fixture with their lower body.
2. Description of Prior Art
Previous inventions use foot pedals, knee operated devices, timers, and proximity detectors to attain the benefits of hands-free, faucet control.
In U.S. Pat. No. 5,135,028 to Richenbach (1992), a foot switch actuates water flow. Effort and thought must go into placing the foot correctly. A change in stance is often required, particularly when stopping and restarting water flow. The foot switch can cause tripping or toe injuries, as it mounts in the area where the user normally moves his/her feet.
The invention described in U.S. Pat. No. 5,095,941 to Betz (1992) uses an air bulb, instead of an obtrusive pedal or switch. Mounting the air bulb can be difficult depending on the type of basin fixture and floor covering. The air bulb necessitates pneumatic lines and devices which complicate aesthetic and inexpensive installation. If mounted higher, the air bulb may be knee actuated. The knee actuated air bulb limits users, according to their height and stance. Larger air bulbs can solve this. However, larger air bulbs make installation and aesthetic coordination more difficult.
In U.S. Pat. No. 4,884,725 to Ahad (1989), a timer controls water flow. Some use of the hands is still required with most timers. The lack of specific and direct flow control makes their use impractical in residential settings. Timers are often inconvenient in public facilities also.
In U.S. Pat. No. 5,074,520 to Lee (1991), a proximity detector controls water flow based on the proximity of the hands or other objects to the waterspout. To implement this invention, any preexisting faucet must be replaced. In U.S. Pat. No. 4,823,414 to Piersimoni (1989), the proximity detector is not part of the faucet, and faucet replacement is not necessary. However, installation often requires drilling into the basin. In both cases, the electronic circuitry involved can raise the cost substantially. More expense may result if there is concern about the aesthetic coordination of the proximity detector with the faucet and/or the basin fixture.
Many versions of the aforementioned faucet-control techniques predated these more modern versions. The majority of the older versions are more complicated, more difficult to install, and generally less desirable. A discussion of the older versions is redundant and lengthy. A discussion of various combinations of the aforementioned faucet-control techniques is also redundant.
Foot pedals, knee operated devices, timers, and proximity detectors are in use. However, to my knowledge, there is no significant residential usage. Many public facilities also lack hands-free, faucet-control devices. The spread of germs and other contaminants is especially an issue in public facilities. As population grows and the usable water supply decreases, economic water conservation devices will be increasingly crucial. Generally, people only use water-conservation devices that are convenient, affordably priced, and inexpensive to install and operate. In many cases, the above described devices require a professional plumber for installation. Many of the above devices use electric power constantly, whether they are in use or not. The amounts vary, but may become significant as electric power costs and environmental concerns increase. Also, if the device is aesthetically displeasing, its widespread use will be diminished, particularly in affluent areas.